Terrorism, niqabs and 1930s Germany

Trudeau compared Harper’s view on Muslims and the niqab to the refusal of Canada to accept Jews who had fled Nazi Germany in 1939

Terrorism, niqabs and 1930s Germany

What took place in Canada during the last week isn’t exactly Godwin’s Law but it is close. The law postulates that if an online discussion goes on long enough, eventually someone will compare something or someone to Hitler or the Nazis. A couple of federal MPs didn’t disappoint.

Last Monday, Liberal leader Justin Trudeau gave a speech on, of all things, liberty. The leader, as progressive always do, went on and on about diversity and inclusion which of course does not include Christians. Trudeau is the leader who announced last year, no candidate will be allowed to run for his party if they are pro-life. As is the trend these days, diversity and inclusion is generally restricted to Muslims.

Trudeau’s speech, which some are referring to as a manifesto, was of course aimed at Prime Minister Harper; specifically Harper’s view that Muslim women should not be granted Canadian citizenship if they are wearing a burqa or niqab during the citizenship ceremony. They must show their face in public while becoming citizens.

In 2011, then Immigration Minister Jason Kenney announced those who are being sworn in as citizens must show their faces during the ceremony. A Montreal woman who wears a niqab refused to show her face while being sworn in although she was willing to show her face to an official in private to prove her identity. Her citizenship was denied and a Federal Court justice ruled there was nothing in the Citizenship Act to require her face be shown while being sworn in as a citizen of Canada. The prime minister was outraged by the decision and the government is appealing.

The heart of Trudeau’s speech was that by opposing a niqab being worn only at a citizenship ceremony, Harper was anti-Muslim, stirring anti-Muslim feelings among Canadians. and telling people what they can and cannot wear.

Trudeau then compared Harper’s view on Muslims and the niqab to the refusal of Canada to accept Jews who had fled Nazi Germany in 1939.

In May 1939 the transatlantic liner, the S.S. St. Louis, left Germany headed for Cuba. The ship carried over 900 Jews, many of whom had applied for not but not yet received visas to the United States. The passengers were hoping to land in Cuba and wait there until their visas were processed. But Cuba denied them entry and so they contacted the United States but never heard back.

The ship then asked for permission to bring the passengers to Canada but were refused by the government of Mackenzie King,  who,  like Trudeau, was a Liberal. Canada refused to allow them to seek refuge in Canada and when a senior immigration official in the King government was asked how many Jews Canada might take, he answered, “none is too many.”

With nowhere else to go, the S.S. St. Louis went back to Germany and its passengers ended up in concentration camps.

The actions of the Jew-hating Liberal government of King is what Trudeau is comparing Harper too

The actions of the Jew-hating Liberal government of King is what Trudeau is comparing Harper too. Unlike the Boy Blunder’s predecessor, Michael Ignatieff, Harper is not opposing the wearing of the niqab by a woman when dealing with any public service. The only ban the Conservatives are talking about is during the course of a citizenship ceremony.

Of course there is nothing similar to the immigration policies of King and Harper. The Harper government has let more Muslims come to Canada than the previous Liberal government did and none are being sent to their deaths by the government. If anything, Harper is upsetting a lot of his base by not stopping Muslim immigration to Canada.

By his remarks Trudeau is actually fanning the flames of division, something he is accusing Harper of doing. He is not only denigrating the Holocaust where millions of Jews and others were murdered, but he is exaggerating the extent of mistreatment if any, to Muslims.

Trudeau can perhaps be forgiven because let’s face it, he is not very bright. This is the guy who told Canadians that budgets balance themselves. And he thought Canada should contribute to the war against ISIS, not by “whipping out their CF-18s” but by providing winter clothing to the Kurds and others opposed to the Islamic State. The statement comparing the niqab ban during citizenship ceremonies to 1939 was just something to be expected of the Boy Blunder.

But Trudeau was not the only MP to invoke Nazi Germany during the week. The government has introduced new terror legislation, highly unpopular on the left and some on the right with accusations of turning Canada’s spy agency into a secret police force with broad powers to spy on and detain Canadian citizens. Another part of the legislation that has angered many Canadians is that it makes it an offence to “promote” terrorism.

In defence of the criminalization of speech in a committee meeting on Bill C-51, Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney said, “The Holocaust did not begin in the gas chambers. It began with words.”

Blaney was taken to task for his comments, even more so than Trudeau because the latter, despite his mental deficiencies, is the darling of the left including the mainstream media. Not that it was undeserved. Unlike the “Hair Apparent,” Blaney is an adult and a cabinet minister in the Conservative government.

As James Morton noted in the National Post, the Holocaust did not begin with words, there were few words at the beginning. It began with laws that discriminated and segregated Germany’s Jews making it easier for the mass killings to occur.

This over-the-top rhetoric about Nazis and the Holocaust by parliamentarians needs to stop. Not only does it minimize what took place in Europe during the 1930s but it is totally irrelevant to what is now happening in Canada.

Mike Godwin must be proud. His law has now expanded from the Internet to the highest levels of the Canadian government.


By Arthur Weinreb